Biggest "forums darlings"

Absolute nonsense. Beating the best in the world excepting himself means being ranked one or two, and beating the number one or number two. The moving the goalpost arguments is nonsense, and anyone who has posted here for any length of time knows that.

The "fact" that Wlad defeated Byrd when Ring had him number one is also well known and the idea that you've somehow "presented" it to me is preposterous.

The interest was born of new lineage, but of course, it's more than that. The best thing a fighter can be is a champion, the best thing a champion can do is face the number one contender in his division. It's the cornerstone of any fighter's legacy, which is why it is so important Wladimir did it.

of course they aren't. And OF COURSE he is "credited" with beating the best that's absurd too. I already said it was a cornerstone win, an important win, that IS credit.

Nonsense. I've been absolutely consistent from the very first time I spoke to you. If you really still didn't understand what was meant, you do now. It has meant that since the very first time you talked to me. Goodness me, it's meant that for a decade before you joined the forum.

It's about 1 v 2 and has been since first we talked.

 

Nah, you're wrong, the phrase means "number one versus number two" it is literally interchangeable with it.

As I told you pages ago, when I explained it to you for the first time, I've never had this problem with a human adult before. But yeah, after it became clear you weren't understanding it properly I did get "hyper specific" and, as I said, if you didn't understand it then, you understand it now.

There's been nothing "further" to discuss for pages, for days, it's just been you making false claims about what I've said or "implied" and then me correcting you.

I'll sum it up a different way: if you think another poster is being racist, don't make that accusation publicly. Report it. If there's a pattern of racist behaviour, let the moderators/owners remove the racist. But even if you disagree with the outcome, find a way to hold it inside, very little good will come of it.

And this part is absolutely true: for as long as you hold onto it for a reason for resistance to Wladimir's all-time standing, you won't get anywhere with your understanding. Even if everything else i've been saying to you is part of a giant conspiracy to obscure my own meaning for my secret delight, that is something I told you that is absolutely true.

 

That's true, but even though it is true, you (eventually) caught on to exactly what it meant. Instead of exploring the idea, readjusting your posts, or doing anything else natural or normal you've spent 3 or 4 posts accusing me of things that aren't true, and quoting me repeatedly to tell me you're not talking to me any more.

What is it you want, exactly?

Well that's far worse. Definitely don't accuse people of being racist when they aren't, it can upset them deeply, spur reports, derail threads and create vendettas.

 

From the very first remark I made you tried to change the meaning of what I was saying to suit you better. Immediately you tried to make what I was saying "worse". Repeatedly you accused me of mis-truths, lies, and refused to accept my explanation that you were wrong about that.

If you want a good faith debate, don't do those things.

 

There are loads. Most of the great heavies defended against their number one contenders. The ones who are in line for grreatness that didn't do it - Wladimir and Dempsey are good examples, though Dempsey probably has a case for when he took the champ, even if he never mounted a sucessful defence against the number one - it absolutely breaks them, and their legacies get wound up around it. The Dempsey chat goes on forever.

It's not rare - not even unusual. That's why it does matter when a heavyweight in line for top tree honours doesn't do it. Marciano managed it 5 times. Louis more. Lewis more than a couple, even though he got cut out of the Vitali match measuring up, which I would like to ignore myself.

Anyway, of the great heavies who never met the best fighter in the world excepting themselves probably just Dempsey and Wladimir.

No, you absolutely cannot undermine Usyk in this way. He took on the number 2 in the world while number one, more than once.

This is far too strict for me, but it would be interesting to see who would come out on top divisionally if you split it up into true era 1/2.